MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361217376 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2022-0270

Micro-mechanical perspective on the role of particle shape in shearing of sands

2023· article· en· W4361217376 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yunbo Huo, Yat Fai Leung, C. Y. Kwok

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscrete element methodShearing (physics)BrittlenessParametric statisticsMechanicsParticle (ecology)Geotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceClassical mechanicsPhysicsGeologyComposite materialMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents a micro-mechanical perspective on the role of realistic particle shapes in shearing of sands through calibration with physical experiments and parametric studies using discrete element method (DEM) to reveal the different mechanics between irregular particles and spherical particles incorporating rolling resistance (μr). To achieve this goal, particle shapes of Toyoura sand were captured by micro-computed tomography and reconstructed using a clump generation algorithm in DEM. The use of clumps in DEM led to closer match with experimental results of triaxial tests at various porosities and confining pressures, which could not be achieved by sphere models with μr. With realistic particle shapes, initial rotations of clumps were allowed until they became interlocked, while the load resistance built up gradually. High coordination numbers were observed, with force chains relatively evenly distributed. In contrast, the use of μr in sphere models promoted the formation of voids that were sustained during the loading process, because rotational motions of particles were hampered by μr and they did not easily collapse into the voids. This was accompanied by polarised strong force network around the voids, leading to more dilative and brittle macroscopic behaviour than observed in physical experiments. These findings illustrate that particle shapes cannot be sufficiently replaced by the use of sphere models and μr due to intrinsic differences in their micro-mechanics.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207